7 December 2015

A brief lesson for Germans (and their disciples) on how to gloss the words of Pope Francis

Reading the accounts in the Bolletino of what our Holy Father said to the Evangelisation people the other day, I was constantly reminded of how his words must need henceforth to be glossed, if we are to accept the unscriptural and novel dogma of the German episcopal conference (and their disciples) to the effect that the Gospel is not for the Jews. Here are some snippets in black from what the Sovereign Pontiff said, to which I have added in red what henceforth, in Germany and its cultural colonies, will need to be added, at least tacitly, as essential glosses.

" ... projecting [missionaries] in every direction, to the very limits of the world, except to Israel and anywhere there are Jews ... going forth is innate in our Baptism, and its boundaries are those of the World, except where there are Jews ... so that [the Church] may always know how to listen to the cry of the poor and the distant, unless they are as distant as Jews, to meet all and announce the joy of the Gospel except to Jews ... ." etc.etc.. You get the hang of it?

Gracious me, how difficult missiological discourse, not to mention the sort of vivid papal rhetoric which is so dear to our beloved Holy Father, is going to become under this Kasper/Marx/Nichols dogma ... "The Gospel According to St Gallen", as we shall have to learn to call it. And how rigorously somebody is going to have to censor the New Testament so as to eliminate all signs of that silly stuff about preaching the Gospel to all the world; not to mention the texts of Vatican II. My tip to readers: buy shares in companies that manufacture blue pencils. And parish treasurers should start setting money aside for the purchase of new extrasuperexpurgated Lectionaries and Missals.

Footnote: I seem to recall that the German episcopate refused to obey Pope Benedict's instruction to abandon their mistranslation of the Lord's words. In the Last Supper Narrative in the Eucharistic Prayer, He speaks of His Blood as shed "for many", which in Germany is still, I think, erroneously rendered as "for all". I wonder what the German is for: "For all except the Jews"? Goodness gracious me, how Hitler must be giggling, if one can do that where he is, which one probably can't.

13 comments:

Protasius said...

The official translation still used in the Missal is indeed "das für euch und für alle vergossen wird", which is shed for you and for all. The new edition of the official German hymnal however already has the corrected translation "das für euch und für viele vergossen wird", which is shed for you and for many. And when the new edition of the German translation of the Missal (which according to rumours is already prepared) will appear, it will include the correct translation.

Robert Selby said...

Paragraph 247 of 'Evangelii Gaudium' of Pope Francis:

247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word.
End-of-Quote.

And Evangelii Gaudium is entered in the 'Acta Apostolicae Sedis'.
which means that it must be given 'religious submission of mind and will'.
(Humani generis 1950)


I don't think this stems from the Germans or that
Francis is some kind of unwilling hostage to interest-group
pressure.

Liam Ronan said...

Well put, Father. After all, Hitler gave licence to Glossy Germany.

Mark said...

And did not St. Paul preach "to the Jew first and also to the Greek"?

How unenlightened he was!

ansgerus said...

@Protasius
..but it is added by use of an asterix and a very small line at the bottom of that page of the hymnal, that this translation is not binding, and can differ in the actual service.

DrAndroSF said...

Although a life-long philoSemite, I have recently undergone a rather thorough revision of my attitude in regard to the Bnai Israel. It has occurred to me that in all the "ecumenical" back and forth between the Church and the Jews, it's pretty much a one-way street of accommodation and change of position. I have not noticed any of the orthodox rabbis in Israel disavow Maimonides' classic estimation of Christianity as gross idolatry. Typical for Western liberals --which is what even our conservatives have become-- once we decide a group has been "victimized" our only response is appeasement and placation, even if it means abandoning core elements of the Faith.

In addition, dealing with Jews as if they were a religion is ludicrously behind the times. It is a simple sociological fact and quite undenied by them that the great majority of them (Ashkenazim especially) have abandoned their people's God and gone a-whoring after all kinds of secular utopian schemes, none of which is at all friendly to the Church that is bending over backwards to appease their tender egos.

You can call me all the names you like, but the whole postVatII deal with the Jews has only benefited them, never us.

Fr John Hunwicke said...

Dear Robert

In the paragraph you quote, I think Francis is listing the things about which we agree with Judaism. And correctly. He chooses explicitly to cite Romans 11:16-18, which is the parable of the Olive Tree, in which the Jewish branches ARE BROKEN OFF so that the wild Gentile shoot can be grafted in. S Paul goes on to say that at the Eschaton, when the fulness of the Gentiles has "entered", the Jewish branches will be grafted back in "and so all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:24-26). Which is exactly what Benedict put into his Good Friday Prayer.

Cardinal Burke, an expert in Canon Law, expressed the view that Evangelii Gaudium is not part of the Magisterium.

Fr John Hunwicke said...

I meant to add that I am not criticising Francis or claiming that he is an unwilling hostage to anyone; I am saying that the attack made by the German and English episcopates upon the Magisterium of Benedict imports an error which will make nonsense of the parts of the teaching of Scripture, and of Vatican II, AND OF FRANCIS, which talk about the Gospel as being for all without exception. On rereading my original post, I do think I made that pretty clear.

Highland Cathedral said...

Is this some new, German-inspired, litany?

We pray...
Except for the Jews
We pray...
Except for the Jews.
Is it not ironic that in a land tainted by its past history the Jews are to be excluded from the benefits of the New Covenant?



Lepanto said...

Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne, N.D.S., (May 1, 1814, Strasbourg, Alsace, France - May 6, 1884, Ein Karem, Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, Ottoman Empire) was a French Jew who converted to Catholicism and became a Jesuit Catholic priest and missionary. He later was a co-founder of the Congregation of Our Lady of Sion, a religious congregation dedicated to the conversion of Jews to the Catholic faith.

The Congregation still exists but now the sisters busy themselves with understanding Judaism and in seeking to 'dialogue' with Jews (and also now, of course, Muslims). Poor Marie-Alphonse!
Is it possible to feel angry in heaven?

Valdemar said...

To be frank, common Church teaching about the salvation of non-Catholics in general has radically changed in the last 50 years so much so that one appears able to subscribe to what used to be considered rank heresy and still remain able to affirm status as an "orthodox" Catholic. Salvation is now stated to come to Protestants, Pope Francis implies it is available to Jews and he also calls people of all religions "believers" which can be taken in various ways and generalized statements about Muslims by this current Pope can also be interpreted to include them among those specially considered by God when their religion is in fact a religion of demons and evil, at least as taught in the past... In fact, he had no problem with entering a Mosque and bowing toward Mecca. Isn't that much like Marcellinus' alleged lighting of a little incense to the Roman Gods? After all, both acts could be interpreted as merely being affirmations of "solidarity" and encouragements to "peaceful dialogue"...

When, if ever, will the Bishops stand up and announce "Enough" and heed the call of CCC 1697 to speak clearly on both the joys and demands of the Gospel? Or is this the New Catholic Church and we are stuck with it?

It appears more and more that the events of CCC 675 is occurring in our time.

Father, if you can, please comment on what I have written here. Am I wrong in what I say?

Valdemar said...

To be frank, common Church teaching about the salvation of non-Catholics in general has radically changed in the last 50 years so much so that one appears able to subscribe to what used to be considered rank heresy and still remain able to affirm status as an "orthodox" Catholic. Salvation is now stated to come to Protestants, Pope Francis implies it is available to Jews and he also calls people of all religions "believers" which can be taken in various ways and generalized statements about Muslims by this current Pope can also be interpreted to include them among those specially considered by God when their religion is in fact a religion of demons and evil, at least as taught in the past... In fact, he had no problem with entering a Mosque and bowing toward Mecca. Isn't that much like Marcellinus' alleged lighting of a little incense to the Roman Gods? After all, both acts could be interpreted as merely being affirmations of "solidarity" and encouragements to "peaceful dialogue"...

When, if ever, will the Bishops stand up and announce "Enough" and heed the call of CCC 1697 to speak clearly on both the joys and demands of the Gospel? Or is this the New Catholic Church and we are stuck with it?

It appears more and more that the events of CCC 675 is occurring in our time.

Father, if you can, please comment on what I have written here. Am I wrong in what I say?

Fr PJM said...

The "wrath of the Lamb" teaches that, yes, there is anger in Heaven.